The function of social workers is not easy to define, particularly at a time when multidisciplinary teams are used to tackle the most difficult social ­problems. Photograph: Don Mcphee for the Guardian

It's more than 30 years since the Barclay report on social work observed: "Too much is generally expected of social workers. We load upon them unrealistic expectations and we then blame them when they do not live up to them. There is confusion about the direction in which they are going and unease about what they should be doing and the way in which they are organised and deployed."

This year's on World Social Work Day marked another milestone when the college published an advice note on the roles and tasks of social workers in England. Its aim is to "enable employers and government to be clear about what social workers are there to do". Social workers will be able to draw on it as "an authoritative source of guidance".

Defining the function of social workers is by no means straightforward. At a time when flexible multidisciplinary teams are seen as the answer to some of the most intractable social problems, such as "troubled" families, eyebrows have been raised at social work staking out its territory. Another concern, voiced by, among others, the British Association of Social Workers [pdf], has been that too precise a definition of "reserved" roles and tasks could be used by cost-cutting commissioners to pay qualified professionals to do those things alone. The late Olive Stevenson, the leading social work academic of her generation, was a great believer in the therapeutic value of time spent in conversation in cars while a social worker ferried a child from A to B.

When the college issued draft proposals for consultation last year, it identified 18 tasks that should always be performed by a social worker and a further 17 where that should usually be the case. It suggested that service inspections should include checks on whether any of these tasks were being performed by other staff.

The final advice note is much more nuanced. Although it still specifies scenarios in which a social worker must be the lead professional because of their unique training – for instance, when safeguarding a child from abuse – and other circumstances where a social worker "should" be in the lead – for instance helping a disabled adult make decisions about independent living – there is nothing about enforcement.

What is new in the final document is an extra section setting out what level of tasks could reasonably be expected of social workers according to their capabilities. A newly qualified worker, it says, should not be given responsibility for cases involving complex risk; decisions on statutory intervention should be taken only by experienced or advanced workers.

This checklist could prove its worth in the months ahead as the first 100 recruits to the Frontline training scheme start their 12-month on-the-job placements followed by a second year of assessed and supported practice. The scheme, designed to draw high-flyers into the profession and which bypasses university training, has attracted an impressive 25 applicants for every place, almost half from Russell Group universities.

It's fair to say that the social work jury remains out on Frontline. These first applicant numbers and profiles appear to vindicate its backers, but there are many critics waiting eagerly to pounce on the first slip.